Kelly v. Kelly

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant contends that the Judicial Hearing Officer (JHO) erred in terminating maintenance because the original award of maintenance was intertwined with the distributive award pursuant to O’Brien v O’Brien (66 NY2d 576), i.e., the distributive award would have been higher if not for the maintenance awarded. That contention is not supported by the record. Rather, the record supports the determination of the JHO that there was a substantial change in circumstances (see,…